Bush Landslide Begins.....

One small Voice

[1smallVoice]

Check it out if you do not beleive me, the proof is on electoral-vote.com

You will see thank Kerry's numbers have dropped since the last debate that Bush is said to have lost. If he lost why did so many states turn blue?

No, the truth is that Bush is making gains and Kerry is falling behind Gore, 2000. There is no way Kerry will win this election.

Also check out obamatruthsquad.org to see how Alan Keyes spanked young Obama in their debate last night.

This is a very good morning, tomorrow will be even better.

[sarasota]

At least Illinois got a little attention nationally and a number of folks here got a chance to hear an alternate point of view. No chance of much Keyes support, but slow and steady may win the race one day...even in corrupt Illinois politics.

[cripplecreek]

Last night on Hardball the entire panel of pundits agreed that republicans are registering to vote in greater numbers than democrats. Ron Reagan Jr and Tom Oliphant did insinuate that republicans were trying to supress democrat registrations.

[chimera]

Recent electoral history shows that if there is a landslide in the making, it is evident much earlier in the contest than now. Clinton in '96, Reagan in '84, Nixon in '72, and Johnson in '64 all had clear and substantial leads for months in advance of the vote. The exceptions might be Reagan in '80, when he pulled away from Carter in the last week of the campaign, after his performance in the debates (and Carter's weak performances) convinced voters that "he was okay" for the job. Bush 41 took the lead after the GOP convention in '88, but held it through the Fall, so that race might be one other recent contest where the eventual winner won big but gained the lead late. I discount Clinton in '92 since 43% of the vote is hardly a landslide (even though is electoral margin was quite large).

So, bottom line, the historical trends seem to be against a Bush landslide at this point, unless things happen very, very rapidly on a somewhat unusual timescale. More likely a redux of 2000, or something close to it.

[diamond6]

I don't want to burst any bubbles, but what about the widespread voter fraud?

[sarasota]

Look out for the fireworks after November 2 if Bush wins. Dem lawyers have had their battle garments on for four years now.

[sarasota]

The spin begins on how the GOP is going to steal the election? Leave it to the boys on Matthews. You know, the boys Terry Kerry wants to keep as boys. Is there any hope for this level of immaturity?

[MEG33]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1242764/posts

Bush Landslide Beginning, look at new EC Numbers!!!!



Why are you doing this?..This is the same thing you posted yesterday.

[Rumierules]

RCP does not use strategic vision (notes that it is a Republican polling outfit). SV is the only poll that Electoral-Vote.com is using. Interesting.

[no dems]

AMEN !!! We better be on top of our game b/c the Dims are convinced we stole Florida from Gore and they will stop at nothing to steal this election.

[Rumierules]

RCP does not use strategic vision (notes that it is a Republican polling outfit). SV is the only poll that Electoral-Vote.com is using. For Ohio that is. Interesting.

[MEG33]

http://realclearpolitics.com/

[1smallVoice]

sorry, try obamatruthsquad.com

[condi2008]

I believe there is going to be fraud on a scale never before perpetuated in American history.

I hate to say I think you're right. I remember thinking after the 2000 election that they'd better spend the next 4 years making sure that the system was fixed to avoid just this kind of thing.....

[1smallVoice]

The numbers change every day and they are going in Bush's favor. It is called abuilding trend which will turn into a landslide victory for Bush. Do you really think Bush lost both debates? The numbers say otherwise. Do you really think total vote elects a president or the electoral college?

Bush is going to win big, very very big.

[MEG33]

NO COMPLACENCY

[MEG33]

Check out Realpolitics averages and don't just use one poll.

[Dave S]

Bush did not lose either debate

Arent we being a little Polyanish? Most conservatives agree that Bush didnt do well in the first debate.

[Dave S]

The Illinos republicans were fools to run someone from another state, period.

Especially someone like Keyes.

[sinkspur]

The numbers change every day and they are going in Bush's favor.

Compared to September 30, the numbers have not been going in Bush's favor. Kerry's debate performances have helped him; Bush's weak performance in the first debate definitely hurt him.

Typically, incumbents don't win or lose in close races. I'm afraid that if Kerry turns in another "debate one" performance, he's going to open a lead that will be hard to overcome.

Bush is not doing a good job of touting the Afghan election results, the overwhelming approval of the war in Australia with the re-election of Howard, and the dwindling number of attacks in Iraq. Kerry's going to try to suck up to the Catholics this week in a "major address," and this stem cell-Christopher Reeve thing is not helping either.

I just don't have a very good feeling about this election, especially with the press firmly on Kerry's side.

[LS]

I agree, and have stated that the final result will be more like 320 EVs, with probably NM, IA, and MN or OR and possibly PA falling into Bush's lap. However, three weeks is a lifetime, and remember the DUI. Now, the DUI was a VERY Bush-specific issue, because it struck at his "anti-Clinton" persona of truthfulness and because GOP/evangelical voters don't take lying very well! OTOH, little would damage Kerry with his base. However, a "Surprise" could still turn off the Indies or move them to Bush---an attack, new threats, a major Kerry gaffe. In that case, a 1-2% swing can mean a swing of, say, 40-50 EVs, moving, say, NJ and ME or PA and MI and OR, or any combination of them, to Bush. So it's not out of the question.

However, generally speaking, you are not only right, but historically there have been very few blowouts. The elections of 1876, 1880, 1884, 1888, and 1892, for example, were VERY close and a few votes would have swung several states. Even in the Great Depression, when FDR was "invincible," the popular vote was quite close in a couple of elections.